Custer chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, Black Hills, D.T. [S.D.]) 1880-1890, 1887-11-26

H''iN' W hh1 IiSE-sNhb u CIV htiNbuihE he
course In the Chicago, 81. Paul, Minneapolis
and Omaha railway grant cases, and formally
resigned his tfice. He refers to Secretary
Lamar letter of the 11th lust, and cites the
case in question, which were adjusted by him
In September.
THE sECRETARY's LETTER.
Secretary Lamar Friday sent o letter TO
Commissioned Sparks sharply replying to a
communication from the latter relative to
the adjustment Of the Chicago, st. Paul, Mia.
n~eapolis aud Omaha railroad land grants, in
forming Sparks in conclusion that either he
or the secretary must forthwith retire from
the department. The case In point is one
wherein Sparks decided that the Omaha road
had forfeited a large amount of their granted
land. Shortly after Secretary Lamar received
Sparks decision and reversed ii, restoring the
lauds to the railroad company, Sparks wrote
a long letter 10 the secretary protesting
against the reversal. The secretary In reply
says that he Is fortunately able to answer 1t
conveniently and with rapidity, because every
point submitted by Sparks has been subjected
to reconsideration ''havlng been presented
through the columns Of the press, whose en-
terprise put them In possession OF these points
before | was appraised that the decision re-
feIred to In your letter had incurred your dis
approval and met with yoOr displeasure.n
The secretary then goes on at great length
TO consider the points In his decision which
Sparks had claimed We're erroneous, and 10
show who, from HIS standpoint, they were cor
rect,
81 have adds he, "ncither disposition to
enter upon a polemic discussion with a sub.
ordinate, por TO engage with him at his In
stance ia a gladitorial combat especially so
In a matter in which he has received my care
fully matured nstruction-matter Of pressing
I'M ortarc &c IN the pubic administration OF
my public duties. la no other way can the
functions of q great public department be
successfully executed than for the chief to
command and the subordinate 20 obey.n
After further considering the various points
raised by the commissioner, the secretary
says: 81 had conceived 1t my duty as the
head OF this department TO direct you as to
what duties I require you to perform. had
also conceived It to be equally your duty
under the same obligations, to obey nay in
structions, or withdraw yourself from the
duty Of go doing In the way recognized under
the laws and ussges of public life in civilized
countries; especially SO when | was myself
but acting 10 direct conform
fly with the recent act OF congress which inn
poses on ne the exclusive duty Of causing
these grants to be adjusted. The practical
effect Of your present course is that you can
not execute my orders and follow my instruc.
tions and cooperate in my administration
without surrcndering opinions which should
be couscIentiously entertained with reference
TO a yiCslly important interest. 1t Is inn
possible for me, IN contravention OF my OWE
opinions, arrived at after long and anxious
study, TO surrender them TO you. Under
these circum stances It is due to the orderly
and decorous administration Of the govern
ment, to important [ullic interests, TO the
common cause confded IL o our hands by the
president, and to personal regard we should
both entertain for him, that he shall be
allowed 10 choose a secretary Of the interior
who will conform his administration to your
opinions, or appoint a com missioner OF pub.
Glands who will administer his bureau IN
harmony of spirit and concert Of action with
the chief Of the department. This alternative
shall submit to the president.
SPARKS LETTER,
On October Z, two decisions OF the secretary
were rendered IN the Omaha cases, nOn-con-
curing IN my adjustments, and overruling
the authority on which they were based. He
directed me at the same time to cause the
grants to be adjusted In conformity with
eaid decisions. | now infer from his publish.
ed letter that these decisions were rot sp.
proved by the Official law advisor for the de.
partment of the interior. The point at issue
IL relative TO the claim Of railroad companies
to indemnity Tor land that, under the railroad
granting acts, were reserved from the opera
ton Of those acts by the express terms OF the
statutes
Previously, in 1875, lands that had been re-
served by the government for Indians and
other purposes, and which were excluded
from the grants and from the operation Of the
granting acte, had been patented or certified
to the companies, both as granted lands and
as indemnity, prosmiscuously with other
lands. THIS seems TO have b.en done In pur-
surance of a practice Of giving railroad COM
paries whatever they asked for, In that year
the title to a large quantity Of such lands In
the state OF Kansas, which had been so erro-
neously conveyed to the Leavenworth and
Galveston Railroad company, was decreed in
valid by the United States supreme court.
Since that date the lands that were reserved
at the date of the graft, or the date of the
definite location Of the roads, as the case may
be, were regarded and treated In the decis-
ions and practice Of this efice and the depart
.rent as excluded, not only from all grants,
but from the indemnity basis under I'll grants
wherein ouch reserved lands are by the terms
OF the law excluded from the operation of
these acts"
The secretary held In the Omaha cases that
the company was entitled to indemnity for
such lands. This decision, II adhered to, will
have the effect to take from the people many
millions OF acres of land within the railroad
indemnity limits, which, by your advice and
with your approval as expressed In the Gull.
ford-Mlller case, hav" been proclaimed In the
country as restored to the public domain.